Allowed

Nishant v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Aug 2022Bail Appl./1231/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application by an accused charged with cheating for misappropriating funds. The High Court allowed bail subject to execution of bond, appearance before investigation, non-interference with witnesses, and no involvement in other crimes.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail conditioned on bond execution, appearance to summons, non-interference with investigation/witnesses, and no other criminal involvement.

Nishant Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1944

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 1231 OF 2022

¶6

Crime No.141/2022 of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam District

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

NISHANT AGED 36 YEARS PULIKKAL HOUSE, VARANAD P.O., CHERTHALA ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688543 BY ADVS. BIJU VIGNESWAR B.PRAMOD NAMITHA JYOTHISH

¶9

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶10

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶11

OTHER PRESENT:

¶12

PP - Smt. Nima Jacob

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A. No.1231 of 2022

: 2 :

VIJU ABRAHAM, J.

- - - - Dated this the 1^st day of August, 2022

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶21

The petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.141/2022 of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam District alleging commission of offence punishable under Section s 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

The prosecution allegation is that, the petitioner was employed as collection executive for the period from 2017 – 2021. His job was to collect samples from other lowly equipped medical laboratories which would be tested in the said Vivid Diagnostics. The petitioner was also expected to collect the charges for the tests from those laboratories and remit the same to Vivid Diagnostics. But the petitioner after having collected the testing charges from these small scale small laboratories, did not remit the entire amount to the above mentioned Vivid Diagnostics and thus misappropriated around Rs.2 lakhs and has committed the aforesaid offence.

¶23

B.A. No.1231 of 2022

¶24

: 3 :

¶25

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the charges levelled against him and he has not misappropriated any amount as alleged by the complainant. It is also submitted that these allegations are not backed by any material what so ever. As a matter of fact these allegations are now being raised against the petitioner only when he gave intimation to the said Vivid Diagnostics about his plans to quit that institution and join another diagnostics centre doing the same kind of business. The said Vivid Diagnostics apprehended that since the petitioner has got close rapport with the small scale laboratories, they would lose business from these laboratories. It is further submitted that the petitioner has summoned to the police station and he appeared before the police twice.

¶26

The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he has misappropriated amounts along with the 1^st accused for the period from 20.03.2018 to 09.09.2021. It is also submitted that the 1^st accused was already arrested and he is released on bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents.

¶27

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

¶28

B.A. No.1231 of 2022

¶29

: 4 :

¶30

and considering the nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to stringent conditions. In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in Crime No.141/2022 of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam District, subject to the following conditions:-

¶31

(i) Petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court ;

¶32

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.141/2022 of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam District as and when summoned to do so;

¶33

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to contact the defacto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.141/2022 of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam District;

¶34

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶35

B.A. No.1231 of 2022

¶36

: 5 :

¶37

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.141/2022 of Palarivattom Police Station, Ernakulam District may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

¶38

It is made clear that it is within the power of the police to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the information if any given by the petitioner, even when the petitioner is on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State(NCT of Delhi) and another(2020(1)KHC 663)

¶39

Sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE

¶40

sm/

Nishant v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishant v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Byju Symon Vs the State of Kerala

Byju Symon, Vs the State of Kerala

Byju Symon Vs State of Kerala

Rajeesh V.P. Vs State of Kerala

Ameer Khan Vs State of Kerala

Sujith S Vs State of Kerala